Many tech bros and VCs pitch their shiny high-tech gagdgets that are posing as “climate solutions.” Things like fusion, direct air capture, and so on… But they don't work as climate solutions. Instead, we should use Occam’s Razor and find the things that work. globalecoguy.org/occams-razor... - ThreadSky

globalecoguy.bsky.social • 56 days ago

Many tech bros and VCs pitch their shiny high-tech gagdgets that are posing as “climate solutions.”

Things like fusion, direct air capture, and so on…

But they don't work as climate solutions.

Instead, we should use Occam’s Razor and find the things that work.

https://globalecoguy.org/occams-razor-for-the-planet-b3a720cc961c

Comments

doctorada.bsky.social•56 days ago

I agree. One of the main reasons I’ve shifted part of my focus to working in regenerative agriculture. 😊

iaindooley.com•56 days ago

We need all of the above though. There is no stable climate without both reducing ongoing emissions and removing substantial carbon from the atmosphere (and no, trees won’t get us there). Long duration storage is another area of substantial research, as well as agtech to mitigate methane.

mmullany.bsky.social•55 days ago

There are likely many non-viable tech based solutions (I’d second your entire list) but without “shiny high-tech gadgets” like PV and wind turbines, we would be in a lot of trouble.

FWIW - there are many minimal impact low tech solutions as well: e.g plant milks, recycling and some peat projects

xoiiku.bsky.social•56 days ago

I agree with your premise. I'd like to suggest that parts of this article could be updated to better reflect the current data. Particularly around the pace of advancements in cellular agriculture, and being clearer about meat consumption in terms of grass-fed greenwashing.

https://bsky.app/profile/globalecoguy.bsky.social/post/3lf64d2lo6s2z

devintaylor.bsky.social•55 days ago

Yes, and the best way to encourage 'all of the above', and fast, is to tax carbon and lower regulation delaying wind, PV, CCS, fusion, geothermal, efficiency, etc.

Do we spend a few $B in government money on research projects, or leverage the $1.5T/yr in private energy investment?

rvengosh.bsky.social•56 days ago

In its early days Solar was also not viewed as a viable solution at scale. Is it possible that the same is true for these other investments you’re talking about?

We should cut down emissions now, but shouldn’t we also be investing heavily developing and scaling other tech should we need it?

globalecoguy.bsky.social•56 days ago

We don't have time to wait, and there are ready-to-go solutions now.

johnmashey.bsky.social•55 days ago

Indeed, and there is much experience in managing *disciplined* R&D processes:
https://archive.nytimes.com/dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/r2-d2-and-other-lessons-from-bell-labs/

ollikr.bsky.social•56 days ago

Possibly. Do we still have the time to hope and wait for these, instead of turning off the tap now with plenty of available and effective solutions?

rvengosh.bsky.social•56 days ago

Emissions should cease and I don’t want fig leafs for oil companies, but what about hard to decarbonize sectors? Even the IPCC is projecting overshoot and correction.

How do we correct an overshoot without tech?

ollikr.bsky.social•56 days ago

First of all by avoiding and reducing harmful economic activities, and then by shifting to better solutions, which is where tech that provides options and alternatives will help, not tech that merely mops up, like carbon capture or methane inhibitors, which don't eliminate the underlying pollution.

ollikr.bsky.social•56 days ago

For example I caused a lot of emissions by travelling the world in my younger years. There are a few places I'd still like to see, and I'd love to be able to take a virtual tour to them one day.
There was something else in this thread that I wanted to reply to, but unfortunately Jonathan blocked me.

g-ill.bsky.social•56 days ago

Fuck the technolibertarian broligarchy! It seems sensible that all possible solutions to the climate crisis be on the table. Including the most obvious & direct one of *stop pumping CO2 & CH4* into the atmosphere. Appropriate techs can be phased in when they’re viable- better than 1️⃣ size fits all.

runefar.bsky.social•55 days ago

As both a scientist and to some people a so called "tech bro". Most "tech bros" would probabily actually agree with you when it comes to implementation. I think where they would conflict with you is what parts you focus on research and refining as well as how. For them, building it is research

scottchaile.bsky.social•56 days ago

All of them, any of them

We need to be trying everything we can think of - no time to argue which is more efficient

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply